Free: Contests & Raffles.
I just received this interesting reply from Michele Culver. What do you guys think?"Dear John,This is in response to your e-mail to the Director of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and me, which is in response to an advertisement (not an article) paid for by the Quileute Tribe that recently ran in the Peninsula Daily News and is on the Tribe's wesite, regarding several co-management agreements WDFW has entered into with the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, and the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe for the remainder of this hunting season. First of all, these are not "secret" agreement, but are the result of government-to-government discussions that WDFW has had with these Treaty Tribes listed above. These Tribes have all hunted on the Olympic Peninsula for decades and the advantage of entering into such agreements is that there are certain overlapping State and Tribal jurisdictions and responsibilities relative to wildlife. WDFW and the respective tribes have certain authorities that potentially pertain to the same wildlife resource and there is a need for the State and Tribes to cooperate in the discharge of their respective authorities in order to ensure that healthy populations of wildlife continue to be available to State and Treaty hunters for harvest.Each of the three Tribes has asserted that their treaty hunting right extends, at a minimum, to the geographic areas covered by our agreements. In some areas, the geographic scope of our agreement overlaps with the Quileute Tribe's treaty hunting area. The Quileute Tribe has raised concerns with the three Tribes and with WDFW regarding the inclusion of the areas of overlap delineated in our agreements. The agreements were reached as part of several government-to-government meetings between WDFW the three Tribes referenced above. We did notify the Quileute Tribe of the agreements and moreover have requested that the Tribes meet amongst themselves and attempt to work together to address their intertribal disagreements. The conservation of wildlife is a key component of WDFW's mission and is one of the primary reasons we enter into co-management agreements with the Tribes. Conservation can be achieved through coordination with the Tribes, which includes shared conservation and/or herd objectives, the sharing of harvest data, coordination in setting hunting seasons and regulations, and enforcement efforts, all of which are addressed in our the co-management agreements that are being called into question.We will continue to work with all of the Tribes on important wildlife conservation and enforcement issues and support any efforts made by the Tribes to ensure coordination is achieved among all of us seeking to have strong wildlife resources in the future. Thank you for sharing your concerns with us.Sincerely,Michele K. CulverRegional Director"
Quote from: pianoman9701 on February 11, 2014, 10:02:42 AMI just received this interesting reply from Michele Culver. What do you guys think?"Dear John,This is in response to your e-mail to the Director of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and me, which is in response to an advertisement (not an article) paid for by the Quileute Tribe that recently ran in the Peninsula Daily News and is on the Tribe's wesite, regarding several co-management agreements WDFW has entered into with the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, and the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe for the remainder of this hunting season. First of all, these are not "secret" agreement, but are the result of government-to-government discussions that WDFW has had with these Treaty Tribes listed above. These Tribes have all hunted on the Olympic Peninsula for decades and the advantage of entering into such agreements is that there are certain overlapping State and Tribal jurisdictions and responsibilities relative to wildlife. WDFW and the respective tribes have certain authorities that potentially pertain to the same wildlife resource and there is a need for the State and Tribes to cooperate in the discharge of their respective authorities in order to ensure that healthy populations of wildlife continue to be available to State and Treaty hunters for harvest.Each of the three Tribes has asserted that their treaty hunting right extends, at a minimum, to the geographic areas covered by our agreements. In some areas, the geographic scope of our agreement overlaps with the Quileute Tribe's treaty hunting area. The Quileute Tribe has raised concerns with the three Tribes and with WDFW regarding the inclusion of the areas of overlap delineated in our agreements. The agreements were reached as part of several government-to-government meetings between WDFW the three Tribes referenced above. We did notify the Quileute Tribe of the agreements and moreover have requested that the Tribes meet amongst themselves and attempt to work together to address their intertribal disagreements. The conservation of wildlife is a key component of WDFW's mission and is one of the primary reasons we enter into co-management agreements with the Tribes. Conservation can be achieved through coordination with the Tribes, which includes shared conservation and/or herd objectives, the sharing of harvest data, coordination in setting hunting seasons and regulations, and enforcement efforts, all of which are addressed in our the co-management agreements that are being called into question.We will continue to work with all of the Tribes on important wildlife conservation and enforcement issues and support any efforts made by the Tribes to ensure coordination is achieved among all of us seeking to have strong wildlife resources in the future. Thank you for sharing your concerns with us.Sincerely,Michele K. CulverRegional Director"I think you should ask her to forward the notice(s) WDFW provided to the public that WDFW was doing this and the public comment they received. WDFW has meetings with tribes all the time that the public is not invited to. How is it not a secret agreement when WDFW meets and enters into agreement without giving notice or including the citizens of Washington?
Quote from: pianoman9701 on February 11, 2014, 10:02:42 AMEach of the three Tribes has asserted that their treaty hunting right extends, at a minimum, to the geographic areas covered by our agreements. In some areas, the geographic scope of our agreement overlaps with the Quileute Tribe's treaty hunting area.Unfortunately this is the "Buchanan test" coming into play. Basically a tribe simply has to provide evidence to WDFW that they hunted an area and WDFW is basically forced into approving the new hunting area.“We’ve asked for what supporting material would support their assertion that that area was used and occupied over a period of time. That’s the Buchanan test, if you will,” Pamplin said. “We’re not in a position, nor do we have any authority to essentially adjudicate a tribe’s traditional hunting area. What we’re doing is looking at the evidence they’re providing and … essentially using our enforcement and prosecution discretion.”http://huntnetwork.net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=7103&keywords=seas
Each of the three Tribes has asserted that their treaty hunting right extends, at a minimum, to the geographic areas covered by our agreements. In some areas, the geographic scope of our agreement overlaps with the Quileute Tribe's treaty hunting area.
"We’re not in a position, nor do we have any authority to essentially adjudicate a tribe’s traditional hunting area. What we’re doing is looking at the evidence they’re providing and … essentially using our enforcement and prosecution discretion.” WDFW is not giving anyone the opportunity to provide evidence that might counter what these 3 tribes presented. They are in effect the judge and jury. If anyone questions their decision they just use the "we wouldn't win in court excuse".At a certain point it might make sense to let a real court decide.
